Where Knowledge Junkies Get Their Fix
McAfee Secure sites help keep you safe from identity theft, credit card fraud, spyware, spam, viruses and online scams
Becky
And the (simulated?) beat goes on
by Becky - August 17, 2007 - 12:34 AM

dfgI keep running into people talking about the “20% chance we’re living in The Matrix thing.” The New York Times Science section published something on the Oxford University philosopher touting the theory that it’s plausible we’re just a function of someone else’s simulations:

“This kind of posthuman might have other ways of having fun, like stimulating their pleasure centers directly,” Dr. Bostrom says. “Maybe they wouldn’t need to do simulations for scientific reasons because they’d have better methodologies for understanding their past. It’s quite possible they would have moral prohibitions against simulating people, although the fact that something is immoral doesn’t mean it won’t happen.”

Dr. Bostrom doesn’t pretend to know which of these hypotheses is more likely, but he thinks none of them can be ruled out. “My gut feeling, and it’s nothing more than that,” he says, “is that there’s a 20 percent chance we’re living in a computer simulation.”

You can check out Dr. Bostrom’s site here. And here’s the abstract from his paper, “Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?”

This paper argues that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a posthuman stage; (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely likely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof); (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. It follows that the belief that there is a significant chance that we will one day become posthumans who run ancestor-simulations is false, unless we are currently living in a simulation. A number of other consequences of this result are also discussed.

And feel free to add to that number…

Comments (2)
  1. Not to discredit any of Dr Bostrom’s work or the possibility that we are living in a simulated reality, but how does “20% chance we’re living in a computer simulation” become “we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation”? If the 20% is his gut feeling, where is this almost certainly coming from?

  2. Thank you for bring this up. I always get the you-are-off-your-rocker look when I try to tell people that it really could be.

    I first read about the possibility in a formal journal (Science?) around 1995. A few years later ‘The Matrix’ hit theaters. The idea sounds ludicrous when you are first introduced to it, but given time, it starts to make sense. I have heard other experts put the odds at much more likely than 20%

    If you want to see a movie about virtual worlds, forget ‘The Matrix’; those movies are actually focus on the fate-vs-destiny argument using a virtual world as the backdrop. ‘The Thirteenth Floor’ is actual about creating virtual worlds and the moral dilemmas posed by establishing these artificial consciousnesses.

    Both movies were released about a month apart, so ‘The Thirteenth Floor’ got labeled as a knock-off. Not so! If you are interested in the topic you can get if from Netflix.

Comment

commenting policy